which is the vnbloudy Sacrifice S. Irenaeus likewise writing against Valentinus the Heretike Irene lib. 4. ca. 32. Aug. cōtra◠Aduersar leg et prophet lib. 1. cap. 20. Iustmusin Dialog ad Tryphonē S. Augustine also and S. Iustinus the martyr do expounde the prophecie for the same Sacrifice Whose sayinges here to reherse to the proufe of so certaine a doctrine it were more tedious then needeful Wherefore this being so sufficiently witnessed by the Auncient Doctours of the Churche against whose auctoritie no noueltie is to be heard as a most vndoubted truth that the sacrifice which Christe made of his body and bloude at his last supper is that pure and Vnbloudy Sacrifice whiche Malachie prophecied should be offered vp vnto God from the Easte to the west this also being no lesse true that Christe appointed and auctorized some to offer the same otherwise to what purpose was it instituted and sith that we reade of none other appointed and auctorized thereto but the Apostles and their successours Priestes of the newe Testament nor haue we heard of any that lawfully euer tooke vpon them to offer the same that were not Priestes with what impudencie is it denyed that the Apostles had and Priestes now haue auctoritie to offer vp this pure Sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christe vnto his Father Thus thou maist perceiue good reader the argument which M. Iewel here ascribeth vnto me and would to seeme ridiculous to conclude rightly for the truth if the due consideration of the circumstances be not omitted Withal thou vnderstandest that who so euer allegeth the figure of Melchisedech and the Prophecie of Malachie to prooue that the Priestes of the new Testament haue auctoritie and power to offer vp Christe vnto his Father he maketh no euil choise of the stoare of authorities by witnesse of which that point is prooued and confirmed As for the mater of greeuance M. Iewel where of you complaine so greeuously which is that I charge them of your syde with wresting by ouerthwart and false interpretation the wordes of the Institution of this Sacrifice the figure of Melchisedech and the Prophecie of Malachie I vttered it vpon very iust occasion as the learned do knowe The same ought to be greuous in dede vnto you not bicause ye are tolde of it by me but bicause it is true Neither thought I it good to exemplifie the mater staying the course of my briefe Answer to your Chalenge by descending vnto the particulars for that my scope and chiefe intent was not to confute the contrary Doctrine but to prooue and establish the truth of this Article by you most wickedly denied If it be pleasure vnto you to beholde paricular places and pointes of your false Legierdemaine disclosed by reading ouer my Confutatiō of your lying Apologie my Reioindre to your Replie that also which M. D. Sander D. Heskins M. Rastel M. Dorman and M. Stapleton haue written against you your luste may happely be satisfied Take your fyl of that vntil more come Iewel Perhappes he vvil say Yee expounde the Prophecie of Malachie sometimes of Praier and sometimes of the Preachinge of the Gospel This vvas neuer the Prophetes meaninge This is an horrible vvreasting of the Scriptures Thus no doubte M. Harding vvil say for othervvise he can say nothinge And yet he knovveth and beinge learned can not choose but knovv that this is the Olde learned Catholique Fathers Exposition touchinge these vvoordes of the Prophete Malachie and not ours He knovveth that the Ancient Father Tertullian saith thus Tertull. contrae Iudaeos Tertull. contra Marcion lib. 4. Hieron in 1. Caput Malach. The pure Sacrifice that Malachias speaketh of that should be offered vp in euery place Est Praedicatio Euangelij vsque ad finem Mundi Is the Preachinge of the Gospel vntil the ende of the worlde And in an other place Simplex Oratio de Conscientia pura The Sacrifice that Malachie meante is a deuoute Praier proceedinge from a pure Conscience He knovveth that S. Hierome expoundeth the same vvoordes in this vvise Dicit Orationes Sanctorum Domino offerendas esse non in vna Orbis Prouincia Iudaea sed in omni loco The Prophete Malachie meaneth hereby That the Praiers of Holy people shoulde be offered vnto God not onely in Iewrie that was one prouince of the worlde but also in al places He knovveth that Eusebius calleth the same Sacrifice of Malachie Euseb. De Demonst. li. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Sacrifice and the Incense of Praier Thus the Holie Catholique Fathers expounded these vvoordes of the Prophete Malachie and yet vvere they not therefore iuaged either ouerthvvarte vvreasters of the Scriptures or horrible deceiuers of the people Novv of the other side if it may please M. Harding to shevvfoorth but one Anciēt Doctour or Father that either by the Exāple of Melchisedech or by force of these vvordes of Malachie vvil conclude that the Priest hath Authoritie and Povver to offer vp Verelie and in dede the Sonne of God vnto his Father he may happily vvinne some credit Harding In defence of your felowes and of your selfe you say that wheras ye expound the prophecie of Malachie somtimes of Praier and sometimes of the preaching of the Ghospel therin ye vse no wreasting of the Scripture nor falshod bicause the old lerned Catholike Fathers haue so expounded the place And here you name Tertullian S. Hierome and Eusebius That the Preaching of the Gospel may be and is called a Sacrifice I denie not Mary that by th'auctoritie which here you pretend to allege out of Tertulliā it is proued and that by the same the meaning of Malachies prophecie is to be drawen quit frō the Sacrifice of th'Aulter this I deny vtterly And how farre your dealīg in these weighty maters cōcerning the faith of a Christē man is to be trusted by this to al it may appere M. Ievvel forgeth a saiyng of his ovvne ād putteth it vpon Tertullian First wheras you beare al men in hand that I know that the Ancient Father Tertullian saith as here you reporte it is very false for how can I know the thing that is not at al Tertullian saith not so These wordes The pure Sacrifice that Malachias speaketh of that should be offered vp in euery place est Praedicatio Euangelij vsque ad finē mundi be not to be found in al Tertullians booke Cōtra Iudaeos Yet you haue put them in a distinct letter in which the sayinges of the Doctors be printed that your Reader should beleue they were the wordes of Tertulliā This is a forgerie wrought in your owne shoppe fathered vpon Tertullian Phy M. Iewel can neither shame nor the feare of God withdraw you from vsing such forged sayinges of your owne with which being by you fathered vpon som Ancient Doctor of the Church your common manner is to face out an vntrue mater as crafty players at Cardes doo as they say with a Carde of ten Nexte
holy Doctours Remembreth he not they were for the more part such Act. 20. as by report of S. Paule the Holy Ghost hath made Bishops to gouerne the Churche of God which he hath purchased with his bloud If thei haue beÌ„ made gouernours of the Church by the holy Ghost may we not boldly say they haue ben taught the truth by the holy Ghost wherewith they might instruct the Church Either the Fathers vvere deceiued or the holy Ghost dissenteth froÌ„ him selfe by M. Ievvel Verily of this doctrine one of these two must folowe That either al the olde learned Fathers were deceiued and taught false doctrine or that the holy Ghost who ruled the penne of them that endited the Scriptures dissented from himselfe speaking in their Successours the learned Fathers For that the Fathers either of their own heads or of priuat inspiratioÌ„ without al warrant of Gods worde instituted this Sacrifice neither M. Iewel saith it nor is it so much as to be suspected The second that is that any dissension or contrarietie be ascribed to the holy Ghoste is hainous blasphemie The first that al the learned Fathers should be deceiued and also deceiue the Churche is not to be graunted For in asmuch as they receiued the spirite of truth which Christe promised to the Apostles Ioan. 14. and were gouerned by the spirite of God and by the same were lead into al truth it ought not to be thought of them in general that they haue inclined vnto falshod specially in so weighty a mater Wherfore it standeth M. Iewel vpon either to deny that the olde learned Fathers haue by their ofte mention of Priestes Aultars and Sacrifice acknowleged the singuler Sacrifice of the Churche or recant what he said of the Scriptures that by any clause or sentence of them it cannot appeare where God appointed any such Sacrifice to be made at al. If he wil say as he semeth to say The Fathers confesse not ne acknowledge not in dede the Sacrifice it selfe but yet ofte tymes they vse the woorde of Sacrifice that is to say they speake of it as also of the Priestes and Aulters to that may be answered that by their woordes we vnderstande their meaning Forasmuch as they confesse it with words and that very oft how can we iudge otherwise of them but that they beleued it also in harte What maketh he the auncient holy Fathers Gods dere frendes placed in authoritie by the holy Ghost to gouerne the Church of God to be double men such as say one thing and thinke an other Why taught they so but that the Churche should beleue so If they would al men to beleue it shal we say they beleued it not them selues When M. Iewel minding to mainteine his Chalenge A shifte deuised bi the schole of this nevve Gospel against the manifold testimonies of the Fathers for the Sacrifice had with him selfe considered this much knowing right wel as thereof he could not be ignoraÌ„t how easy a thing it were for the Catholikes to allege infinite places out of the olde learned Fathers for witnesse and proufe of their faith and of the Churches faith coÌ„cerning this Sacrifice for some shew at least of a colorable answer to be made he deuised this shift or rather vseth a shift inueÌ„ted by the deuisers of this newe Gospel in whose schoole he hath learned his newe diuinitie As the Fathers saith he delited themselues with the wordes Sabbatum Parasceâ—e Pascha Pentecoste and other termes of the olde Lawe notwithstanding the obseruation and Ceremonie thereof were then abolished so they delited themselues oftetimes with these wordes Sacerdos Altare SacrificiuÌ„ Sacrificer Aulter Sacrifice notwithstaÌ„ding the vse hereof were theÌ„ clearly expired This great mater is not so lightlye carried awaye M. Iewel Although with force of your sworde with your mattockes and pickaxes ye haue cut hewed and throweÌ„ downe al the holy Aulters of the Churches of Englande and therefore of the Churches of Christe haue made the Synagoges of Antichrist yet with this sclender worde of yours ye caÌ„ not bereue the whole Church of God of the priesthod of the Aulters of the Sacrifice apperteining to the newe Testament M. Ievvel maketh the Fathers to speak one thing aÌ„d to meane an other If there be no vse of Priestes Aulters and Sacrifice is it to be thought the olde learned Fathers hartes could serue them so ofteÌ„times to speake and write of theÌ„ aÌ„d to deceiue the people coÌ„mitted to their charge for their delite and pleasures sake BeloÌ„ged it to their grauitie holinesse and loue of truth to delite and solace them selues with falshod to vse hypocrisie and as it were legiérdemaine by speaking one thing aÌ„d meaning another to serue Gods people with voide and empty words as it were with pipt nuttes Whiles they teach theÌ„ a doctrin of great importaÌ„ce to vse words that coÌ„tein not the mater which their proper significatioÌ„ reporteth This were crafty cifring it were not right aÌ„d plaine teaching Verely we ought to iudge better of the holy Fathers aÌ„d to thinke that men endued with so great grace swarued not froÌ„ the vpright coÌ„science touching the vse of termes which one of the best lerned of theÌ„ speaketh of Whose words be these wherby it appereth how rightly warely aÌ„d circuÌ„spectly they vsed to speake Aug. de Ciuit. Dei libr. 10. cap. 23. Vse aâ—d obseruatioÌ„ of SabbatuÌ„ Pascha Altare etcâ— is double olde and nevve Nobis ad certaÌ„ regulaÌ„ loqui fas est ne verboruÌ„ liceÌ„tia etiaÌ„ de rebê° quae his significaÌ„tur impiaÌ„ gignat opinioneÌ„ It is right saith he that we speak after a certain rule least the ouermuch libertie of words ingeÌ„der an opinioÌ„ of the thiÌ„gs which by theÌ„ be signified But for a ful answer to you M. Iewel where as you affirme the ObseruatioÌ„ and vse of that is signified by these wordes SabbatuÌ„ Parasceue Pascha PeÌ„tecoste Sacerdos Altare SacrificiuÌ„ to be vtterly abolished and clearly expired in the newe TestameÌ„t you seme either of ignorance not to vnderstand or of malice to disseÌ„ble that the obseruation and vse of these things is of two sortes old and new Legal and Euangelical Iewish and Christian. The olde Legal or Iewish Obseruation and vse of these was clearly expired in right by the comming of Christ specially at what time hanging on the Crosse and now geuing vp the ghoste Ioan. 19. he said Consummatum est It is finished The newe Euangelical and Christian obseruatioÌ„ and vse hereof remaineth in the Church and shall remaine so long as the Church continueth The Iewish Ceremonie of these is quite abolished we grauÌ„t neither be they now in Christs Catholike Church vsed as the Iewes vsed them But the faithful ChristiaÌ„s now kepe vse and celebrate their Sabboth that is to say their restingtide their Parasceue or preparingtide coÌ„monly called Goodfriday their Pascha or Easter their Pentecost or Whitsontide their Priesthod their Aulter their Sacrifice in
as I brought how aptely they serue to this purpose and how directely thei strike the marke it doth already I doubt not appeare to such as with an indifferent eye haue perused myne Aunswere to this your seuenteenth Article And more euidently it shal appeare with Gods grace by this processe when the weakenes and falshoode of your Replie shal be detected and thereby it shal be prooued that your vaine Chalenge being too malepertly and presumptuously made standeth neither vpon good nor conuenient termes but vpon a deuilish denial vnmeete to procede out of any Christian mans mouth The .3 Diuision The Ansvvere THe Scripture it selfe ministring euideÌ„t proufe for the OblatioÌ„ of Christ to his Father by the Priestes of the New Testament in the Institution of this Holy Sacrament in the figure of Melchisedech and in the Prophecie of Malachie the Prophete the authorities of the Fathers needed not to be alleaged were not the same Scripture by the ouerthwarte and false interpretations of our aduersaries wrested and tourned to a coÌ„trary sense to the horrible seducing of the vnlearned Iewel Alas vvhat toole is there so vveake that M. Harding vvil refuse to strike vvithal To prooue his imagined Kind of Sacrifice he hath brought vs forth out of his great stoare the example of Melchisedeck and the Prophecie of Malachie As if he vvould reason thus God saith vnto Christ Thou arte a Priest for euer according to the order of Melchisedek Psal. 110. Or God saith by the Prophete Malachie Malac. 1. A pure Oblation shal be offred vnto me in euery place Ergo The Priest hath Authoritie and power to offer vp the Sonne of God vnto his Father If he had not had good choise and stoare of Authorities he vvould neuer haue begonne vvith these But he addeth further as mater of greeuance That these plaine Scriptures by the ouerthwarte and false Interpretations of his Aduersaries are wreasted and turned to a contrary sense and that as he saith to the horrible seducing of the vnlearned Doubtlesse here is a very horrible accusation Hovv be it if vve happely had mistaken these places and our errour therein vvere fully prooued yet should not M. Harding in such horrible termes reprooue vs for doing that thing once that he and his felovves doo so often But by vvhat vvordes by vvhat false Interpretation into vvhat peruerse or Heretical Sense haue vve so horribly vvreasted these Scriptures M. Harding is vvise is eloquente is vvatcheful is circumspecte is fast addicted vnto his cause he dissembleth and leaueth nothing that any vvay may sexue his purpose If our Errours be so horrible he should not haue spared them If there be none he should not thus haue touched them If M. Hardinge vvinke at them vvho can see them If M. Hardinge knovv them not vvho can knovv them Harding Whether my tooles be weake as you ieast or of good strength let it be iudged by the strokes they geue with which doubteles the heresie that ye sustaine aganst the outward and sigular Sacrifice of the Churche is striken downe and quite ouerthrowen And the same tooles haue the chiefe Doctours and auncient Fathers of the Church vsed before me By the tooles I meane as you doo the Figure of Melchisedech and the Prophecie of Malachie by which the doctrine of the Church concerning the Sacrifice of the body and bloude of Christe is auouched And here to enter into that special point litle esteming your other impertinent talke which you thinke toucheth my person and wise men see helpeth not your cause directing my wordes to the Reader of whom I may conceiue better hope then I doo of you thus I say The Argument which M. Iewel here maketh as on my behalfe albeit to the learned who knowe and vnderstand the circumstances of the figure of Melchisedech and of the prophecie of Malachie concludeth sufficiently and fully yet thou maist be wel assured good Reader I would neuer my selfe haue proponed it so nakedly and without any declaration of the necessary circumstances Although there folow hereafter more proper placâ—s to open the figure of Melchisedech and the prophecie of Malachie where I bring them in for proufe of this intent yet bicause M. Iewel hath by preuention abruptly fallen into them and to the ende noman be deceiued by his cutted argument which in deede is good if the circumstances were not guilefully conceeled here I thinke good to vtter some of those circumstances To beginne therfore with Melchisedech It may please thee Reader to vnderstand that he is recorded in the Scripture to be a Priest of God the highest Gen. 14. Then being a Priest it behoued him to offer Sacrifice according vnto S. Paules doctrine Heb. 5. Euery Bishop or Priest taken from among men is for men appointed in those thinges that belong to God to offer vp giftes and sacrifices for sinnes What sacrifice then did he offer He offered vp bread and wine as Arnobius that auncient Father That Melchisedek offered bread and vvine beside sundry other Doctours doth witnesse notwithstanding the Scripture make plaine and expresse mention only of bringing forth bread and wine His wordes be these Christus per mysterium panis vinisacerdos sactus est secundùm ordineÌ„ Melchisedech Arnob. in Psal. 109. qui panem vinum solus obtalit in sacerdotibus dum Abraham Victor reuerteretur de praelio By the mysterie of bread and wine Christ became a Priest after the order of Melchisedech who onely among the Priestes offered bread and wine when Abraham returned conquerour from bataile Cyprian epist. ad Cecilium lib. 2. epistola 3. This order saith S. Cyprian speaking of the order of Melchisedech is here comming of that sacrifice he meaneth Melchisedeks sacrifice and descending from thens that Melchisedech was the priest of the highest God that he offered bread and wine that he blessed AbrahaÌ„ Here it is expressely affirmed that Melchisedech offered bread and wine and moreouer that Christ by doing the like was made a Priest according to the order of the same Melchisedek That Christe at his Supper shewed him selfe a priest after the order of Melchisedek But when and where did Christe beginne to shewe him selfe a Prieste in offering sacrifice after that Order Verely at his last Supper For of that he did vppon the Crosse whereof the Sacrifice of the Supper taketh his merite now I speake not And that he did so at his laste Supper S. Hierome in his Commentaries vpon the .26 chapter of S. Matthew is an euident witnesse where he saith thus Hieron in Mat. 26. Post quam typicum Pascha fuerat impletum Agni carnes cum Apostolis comederat assumit panem qui confortat cor hominis ad verum Paschae transgreditur sacramentum vt quomodo in praefiguratione eius Melchisedech summi Dei sacerdos panem vinum offerens fecerat ipse quoque veritatem sui corporis sanguinis repraesentaret After that the figuratiue Passeouer had ben fulfilled and
deny the Argument For there be two kindes of signes One is significatiue onely the other exhibitiue which doth not only betoken or signifie but also exhibiteth and geueth the thing signified In the olde Lawe the vnleuened bread signified onely that the feast of Easter was to be celebrated with sinceritie of harte and life The corporal purgations signified only the cleansing of myndes But Baptisme in the newe Lawe doth not only signifie but also exhibiteth and worketh the Wasshing of synnes and is the ablution it selfe or wasshing away of sinnes Likewise the holy Euchariste doth not onely betoken or signifie the body and bloud of Christe but contineth and exhibiteth it present Signū signatum exhibitiuū and is the very body and bloude of Christ it is signū signatū exhibitiuū Thus it appeareth how the Sacramentaries Argument is naught The Sacrament is a signe ergo it is not the body For it is both a signe and the body it sefe For if any wil say it is a signe significatiue only it is to be denied as false and contrary to the manifest wordes of Scripture and the expositions of al the Fathers Now I reporte me to the iudgement of the discrete Reader what aduauntage M. Iewel hath gotten by the terme antitypon alleged out of S. Clement against the blessed Sacrifice of the Churche S. Clemēt corrupted by M. Ievvel On the other side what aduauntage may iustly be taken against him for that most falsly he hath corrupted his author For looke Reader vpon the shorte testimonie which he allegeth out of S. Clement and thou shal finde that M. Iewel hath cut of out of the middest two wordes of greatest force for the vnderstanding of that goeth there immediatly before that by falshod he might geue at least some colour vnto his Reply where in truth he had none at al. The wordes falsly cut away be these Clemen Constitut. lib. 6. cap. 30. acceptabilemque Eucharistiam So that the whole sentence is this in S. Clement Antitypum regalis corporis Christi acceptabilēque Eucharistiam offerte in Ecclesiis coemeteriis vestris Offer ye vp the sampler of the roial body of Christ and the acceptable Euchariste in your Churches and burying places These two wordes with the sleight of falsifying nipte away by M. Iewel be so requisite to the vnderstanding of the authours meaning that without them mater of cauil by reason of the terme antitypon may be ministred vnto such as be more ready to impugne then to defend the doctrine of the vniuersal Churche touching the substance of the Sacrament and Sacrifice of the Aulter Contrarywise being leaft in the sentence considered and rightly vnderstanded they exclude al occasion of doubte or cauil that might rise through the other terme of more obscuritie For the Euchariste without doubt in that age being taken for the body of Christ how can it be conceiued that the other terme antitypon in the same place ioyned by a copulatiue together with it should importe the contrary That S. Clement meant by the Eucharist the true and real body of Christe it is euident by that we finde in the learned Fathers of that age namely S. Ignatius and S. Ireneus who lyued in or sone after S. Clementes tyme. S. Irenaeus saith Irenaeus lib. 4. ca. 34. that the breade hauing receiued the calling vpon of the name of God whereby he meaneth the Consecration is no more common bread but Eucharistia ex duabus rebus constans terrena coelesti the Euchariste consisting of two thinges the one earthly whereby he vnderstandeth the forme of bread the other heauenly which is the body of our Sauiour The Euchariste maketh our bodies to be immortal And that it appeare certainely that he thought the Euchariste to be the body and bloude of Christe he proueth that our bodies shal not remaine in corruption but haue the resurrection that is hoped for bicause they receiue the Euchariste and be fed with the flesh and bloude of our Lorde Ignat. ad Smyrnen apud theo dorit li. 3. Dialog S. Ignatius likewise in an Epistle ad Smyrnenses as Theodoritus allegeth him in the third booke of his Dialogues writing against certaine Heretikes that would haue neither Euchariste nor Sacrifice auoucheth the Eucharist to be the flesh of Christe The Eutheriste is the flesh of Christ that suffered for vs. These be his wordes Eucharistias oblationes non admittunt eò quòd non confiteantur Eucharistiā esse carnēseruatoris nostri Iesu Christi quae pro peccatis nostris passa est quam Pater sua benignitate suscitauit Eucharistes and oblations they wil not admit bicause they wil not confesse the Euchariste to be the flesh of our Sauiour Iesus Christe which flesh suffered for our sinnes and which the Father of his goodnes raised vp from death Marke Reader this auncient Father and blessed Martyr saith not the Euchariste signifieth Christes flesh but is Christes flesh yea that flesh which was crucified buried and rose againe And although Theodoritus alleged this authoritie to proue that it was the humaine flesh and not the Godhed of Christe that suffered death and rose againe which he proueth by the later parte of the same yet it principally proueth our purpose that the Euchariste is the true flesh of Christe Againe onlesse the selfe same flesh of Christe be in the Euchariste which died vpon the Crosse and rose againe this authoritie auailed Theodoritus nothing to proue that Christes flesh was crucified and raised vp againe Wherefore for so much as it is cleare by the testimonies of S. Ignatius and S. Irenaeus who liued not long after S. Clements time that the beleefe of their age was the Euchariste to be the flesh and bloude of Christe how can M. Iewel kepe his credite with any man that loueth truth and not seme to haue intended crafte and deceite in that of purpose least the truth should appeare manifest he falsified his auctor by clipping away those two wordes from the middest of the sentence that make directly against him and put away al doubte of contrary sense Thus to mainteine the false doctrine of his arrogant Chalenge he feareth not to violate the Fathers to corrupte their writings to deceiue the worlde to purchase him selfe the most reprocheful name of a falsifier By such champions such quarrels are mainteined Constitut. lib. 8. As for the other place of S. Clement where he saith offerimus hunc panem hoc poculum we offer this breade and this cuppe who nowe a daies knoweth not that the Sacrament sometimes is called by the name of breade and wine not bicause the substance of breade and wine remaineth but bicause the outwarde formes taft and other qualities of breade and wine be sene felt and perceiued bicause before consecration it was breade and wine and bicause it is the true breade and wine that came downe from heauen Neither doth S. Clement which is to be noted
to doo and make the thing which he had done that is to say to take bread and wine to geue thankes to blesse to breake the bread and to say in the person of Christe this is my Body this is my Bloude c. Which he calleth offering of spiritual sacrifice bicause that body and bloud of Christe are thus offered vp spiritually and in a Mysterie without bloudshed And also that the Apostles afterward instituted Priestes Deacons Subdeacons and Readers S. Chrysostom excusing him selfe for that he presumed to minister vnto Christe at his holy table and gathering boldnesse of that Christe him selfe had commaunded it saith Chrysost. in Liturgia Sacrificiorum ritum instituisti ac solennis huius immaculati Sacrificij celebrationem nobis tradidisti tanquà m Dominus omnium Thou Christe hast instituted the rite of sacrificing and hast deliuered vnto vs the celebration of this solemne and vnspotted Sacrifice as Lord of al. And afterward he saith moreouer hauing rehearsed what Christ did and said at the Supper memoriam igitur agentes salutaris huius mandati we kepe the memorie of this healthful commaundement meaning the commandement geuen by these wordes Luc. 22. Do ye this in my Remembrance When S. Chrysostome saith Christ deliuered the celebration of this Sacrifice vnto vs it is to be considered vnto which vs and when he did deliuer it S. Chrysostome was a Bishop and therefore a Priest so then naming vs he meant Priestes The time when it was deliuered was at his last Supper For the Scripture geueth no occasion to thinke that Christ leafte to Priestes the celebratiō of this Sacrifice any where els but where he said vnto his Apostles Luc. 22. 1. Cor. 11. Doo ye this in my remembrance S. Dionyse the Areopagite S. Paules scholer doth acknowledge and in most plaine wordes confesse that Christe by these woordes gaue commaundement to Priestes to offer vp this diuine Sacrifice Thus he saith Quocirca Antistes reuerenter ex Pontificali officio Dionys. in Ecclesiast Hierarch part 3. c. 3. post sacras diuinorum operum Laudes quòd hostiam salutarem quae supra ipsum est litet se excusat ad ipsum primò decenter exclamans Tu dixisti hoc facite in mei commemorationem The Bishop therfore after he hath praised the workes of God excuseth him selfe reuerently and according to his Bishoply office for that he sacrificeth the heathful hoste which is aboue his worthinesse semely first crying vnto him Thou ô Christ hast said Do ye this in my remēbrance Thus it appeareth clearely by this auncient Bishop and blessed Martyr who is to be thought to haue learned the same of S. Paule him self as also by sundry other Fathers of whome some be already alleged some hereafter shal be alleged that Christe by these woordes Doo ye this in my remembrance gaue to Priestes auctoritie and commission to offer vp the healthful Sacrifice which can be none other but that of his body and bloude and that by the same wordes they vnderstode them selues both charged so to doo and also excused of presumption in doing the doing of it being a thing that so farre passeth the worthinesse of humaine condition But M. Iewel to put away wholly the Sacrifice whereas Christe said doo ye this in my remembrance saith very strangely and boldly M. Ievvel vvold al the people to be Ministers of the Sacrifice that this doing perteineth not only vnto the Apostles and their successours but also vnto the whole people And he beareth the worlde in hande that this is the cleare meaning of Christe bicause of these wordes in my remembrance As though bicause that heauenly Sacrifice is to be offered in remembrance of Christe therefore the common people and euery one of them should haue the handling of the diuine Mysteries and be made the Ministers of them If this be true weemen haue much wrong among whom in so many hundred yeres as haue ben since Christ gaue this commaundement none was yet euer admitted vnto that administration And if it perteine vnto the whole people as M. Iewel saith why should weemen be excluded In dede it were a great ease for these holy Ministers that their good wiues ministred sometimes in the Cōgregations for them whiles they be playing with their children or keeling the potre at home He should haue done wel to haue proued this strange point more substantially sith there by he should do great pleasure to his felow Ministers to many other good felowes and specially to many good sad dames of his owne Gospel whose curiositie would be wel pleased if they were admitted to minister and to doo so much as these wordes of Christe doo importe doo ye this in my remēbrance The deuil hauing sowed hatred in M. Iewels breste against the priesthod and Sacrifice of the newe Testament hath brought him vnto this fowle absurditie Peraduenture to auoide so great an inconuenience he wil say that these wordes doo principally perteine vnto the Ministers who haue succeded the Apostles in this ministerie and secondarily vnto the faithful people If he say so let him withal consider that being so vnderstanded they may wel serue for the Apostles to claime vnto them selues the auctoritie of Priesthod to offer vp the Sacrifice and also to ordeine priestes to succede them For as touching the office of a Priest it is a cōfessed truth that the Priest in offering the body and bloud of Christ is the principal agent concerning outward ministerie and as it were the instrument of the people which by a certaine meane offereth also geuing vnto the Priestes action their assent and applying their deuotion Much like to that we say of a multitude to make a supplication when one man is the speaker and chiefe dooer and the reste only geue their consent to that is said and done And what though S. Paule say vnto the Corinthians 1. Cor. 11. As often as ye shall eate this bread and drinke this Cuppe ye shal shewe forth our Lordes death vntil he come wil it folow thereof that Christe speaking these wordes doo ye this in my remembrance woulde the whole people to doo that he at his supper did That is to say that euery lay person boye and woman for they be of the number of the people shal take bread blesse and geue thankes and vtter the wordes of consecration This is my body and likewise the cuppe saying this is my bloude c Doth he not vnderstand there is great difference betwen this commaundement of Christ and that saying of S. Paule betwen doo this in my remembrance which Christe saith and when so euer ye eate this bread and drinke this cuppe ye shew forth our Lordes death whiche S. Paule saith Seeth he not the one to belong vnto the Priest as he is the pronuncer of the Diuine wordes whereby the holy Euchariste is consecrate and made the other to be referred vnto them that receiue it after it is consecrate And though
both tende to one ende that is to celebrate the memorie of Christes death yet be not the actions diuers and may they not be done by diuers persons as it happeth when the people receiueth the body of Christe at the priestes handes This much may serue also for answer to the autoritie brought out of S. Chrysostome For the circumstance of the place declareth euidently that he spake there of the peoples receiuing of the mysteries And so in that place facere signifieth onely to receiue and not to consecrate and minister the Sacrament M. Ievv corrupteth S. Chrysostome And here M. Iewel least he should not be alwaies like vnto him selfe altereth and changeth his authours wordes and maketh S. Chrysostomes wordes to sounde to the aduantage of his owne false purpose For whereas S. Chrysostome saith thus Chrysost. hom 61. ad Pop. Antioch Quotiescunque hoc feceritis mortem Domini annunciabitis hoc est facietis commemorationem salutis vestrae beneficij mei As often as ye shal do this ye shal set forth our Lordes death that is to say ye shal make a commemoration of your saluation being my benefite M. Iewel allegeth him thus Hoc facite in memoriam beneficij mei salutis vestrae Doo ye this in remenbrance of my benefite and of your saluation Wherein he falsifieth the Doctor maketh a false translation of the place and geueth out a sense contrary to S. Chrxsostomes meaning Such aduenturing to alter Modes and Tenses to tel an other tale then the Doctor alleged telleth to leaue out to put in wordes of priuate forgerie is a most certaine argument of vntrue dealing and of guile intended of M. Iewels parte The 5. Diuision The Ansvver THat Christe offred him selfe to his Father in his last Supper and that Priestes by those woordes Doo this in my remeÌ„braunce haue not onely auctoritie but also a special commaundement to doo the same and that the Figure of Melchisedech and the Prophecie of Malachie perteineth to this Sacrifice and maketh proufe of the same let vs see by the testimonies of the Fathers what doctrine th'Apostles haue left to the Church Eusebius Caesariensis hath these woordes Euseb. li. 1 de demoÌ„strat Horrorem afferentia Mensae Christi Sacrificia Supremo Deo offerre per eminentissimum omnium ipsius Pontificem edocti sumus We are taught saith he to offer vnto our Supreme God the Sacrifices of Christes Table which cause vs to tremble and quake for feare by his Bishop highest of al. Here he calleth Christe in respect of his Sacrifice Gods Bishop highest of al Bishoppes the Sacrifices of Christes Table he calleth the Bodie and Bloude of Christe bicause at the Table in his last Supper he Sacrificed and offered the same and for that it is his very Bodie and his very Bloude imagination onely Phantasie and Figure set aparte he termeth these Sacrifices as commonly the auncient Fathers doo horrible causing trembling and feare And whereas he saithe we haue bene taught to offer these Sacrifices to God doubtlesse he meaneth by these woordes of Christe Doo this in my remembraunce This is my Bodie whiche is geuen for you This is my Bloude whiche is shedde for you Clement in his eight Booke often cited speaking of the Sacrifice offered by the Apostles commonly addeth these woordes Secundùm ipsius ordinationem or ipso ordinante whereby he confesseth it to be Christes owne ordinaunce Iewel To proue that the Priest offereth vp the Sonne of God M. Hardinge hath here brought in Euseâ—ius an Ancient Father that neuer once named any suche Oblation of the Sonne of God So much is he opprest and encombred vvith his stoare True it is The Ministration of the Holy Communion is oftentimes of the olde learned Fathers called a Sacrifice not for that they thought the Prieste had Authoritie to Sacrifice the Sonne of God but for that therein vvee offer vp vnto God Thankes and Praises for that greate Sacrifice once made vpon the Crosse. So saithe S. Augustine August ad PetruÌ„ Diaco ca. 19. In isto Sacrificio est gratiarum actio Commemoratio Carnis Christi quam pro nobis obtulit In this Sacrifice is a Thankes geuinge and a remembrance of the flesh of Christe Euseb. De demonstr li. 1. c. 10. whiche he hath offered for vs. Likevvise Eusebius saithe Christe after al other thinges donne made a marueilous Oblation and a passinge Sacrifice vnto his Father vpon his Crosse for the Saluation of vs al Nazian in Apolog. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 geuinge vnto vs to offer continually vnto God a Remembrance in steede of a Sacrifice So Nazianzenus calleth the Holy Communion A Figure of that great Mysterie of the Deathe of Christe This is it that Eusebius calleth The Sacrifice of the Lordes Table VVhiche also he calleth Sacrificium Laudis The Sacrifice of Praise Harding M. Iewels Replye in this Diuision is of smal pith and substance Least he should seme to say nothing whereas in deede he hath nothing to say whereby clearely to auoide the force of Eusebius authoritie by me alleged he darkeneth the mater with many wordes partly of his owne partly of other Doctours to litle purpose rehersed The effect of his whole tale consisteth in these .4 pointes First he denieth that Eusebius euer named any such Sacrifice of the Sonne of God vnto his Father Secondly he adknowlegeth the Ministration of the holy Communion for so he calleth it of the olde learned Fathers to be called a Sacrifice bicause of thankes and praises therein offered vnto God Thirdly he alloweth not the Argumente made out of Eusebius for proufe that Christe is offered vnto his Father Fourthly he pretendeth to shewe causes why the Sacrifice of the Communion is dredful and causeth the harte to tremble Touching the first what meane you M. Iewel by saying that Eusebius neuer once named any suche oblation of the Sonne of God Be you so addicted to the precise termes of your own Chalenge M. Ievvel is driuen from the mater vnto precise vvordes that other wordes of equal force may not be admitted Verely this declareth the weaknesse of your cause and openeth your poore shifte to the worlde which is that whereas you are conuicte by cleare truth of thinges yet you runne for succour vnto the shadowe of wordes You denye by the wordes of your Chalenge that by witnesse of any doctor within the first six hundred yeres after Christe we are hable to shewe that a Priest hath auctoritie to offer vp Christe vnto his Father Now this are we hable to proue as by diuers others so in this place by testimonie of Eusebius though expressely he name it not an oblation of the Sonne of God And for asmuch as you stand vpon your owne precise termes you shal be driuen from your holde by a precise Argument Answer it if you can What so euer we that are Priestes haue ben taught by Christe to doo to doo the same we haue auctoritie But we haue ben
damnation Like as it happeth sometimes a Prince to reiecte a very pretious Iuel offered by his enemie or one that he fauoureth not not bicause the Iuel misliketh him but bicause the partie that offered it was his foe or out of his fauour And whereas M. Iewel would haue it seme absurde that the Father should be entreated with his merciful and fauourable countenance to looke vpon the holy bread of life euerlasting In Canone Missae and the cuppe of perpetual saluation and to accepte the same as he vouchesaued to accepte the giftes and Sacrifices of Abel Abraham and Melchisedech for so the Priest prayeth at the Masse and not as M. Iewel to colourable aduantage falsly reporteth it I answer that happy be we if for our behalfe he wil so accepte that our Sacrifice as he did the Sacrifices of those holy men his dere frendes Furthermore M. Iewel is not ignorant if he be so wel learned as he is thought to be that the aduerbe of simimilitude Sicuti As Sicuti doth not alwaies signifie a ful equalitie but onely a likenesse in some parte and degree As for example it doth in that prayer which Christe made vnto his Father for his chosen Iohan. 1◠Pater sancte serua eos in nomine tuo quos dedisti mihi vt sint vnum sicut nos O Holy Father keepe them in thy name whom thou hast geuen vnto me that they may be one as wee are In this Prayer Christes meaninge was not that the electe shoulde be thoroughly in substance al one as God the Father and God the Sonne be but one in charitie wil and concorde thinking al one thing and willing al one thing Theophyl in Iohan. cap. 17. as Theophilacte with other Doctours expoundeth the place And whereas the Scripture saith in the person of God speaking vnto Iosue Sicut cum Moyse fui Iosue 3. ita tecum sum As I was with Moyses euen so I am with the also It is not meant that God was with Moyses in no greater an higher degree of power and vertue then he was with Iosue For Moyses was admitted vnto a peerlesse frendship with God and endewed with more special auctoritie then euer Iosue was as the Scriptures doo euidently witnesse So doth the Churche besech the Father to looke vpō that holy bread and cuppe of life and health euerlasting that is to say the body and bloude of his Sonne Iesus Christ with a merciful and cleare countenance as he did vpō the sacrifices of Abel Abrahā and Melchisede◠not that it is mistrusted least God be lesse or not infinitely more pleased with the one Sacrifice then with the other but that humbly we thinke it shal be wel with vs if he respecte See what I say touching this Prayer of the Canon in the last Diuision beholde and allowe the ministerie and deuotion of vs as farre forth as he did the deuotion of the others Of this M. Iewel geueth me occasion to speake more in the last Diuision of this Article If M. Iewel had in his harte so much deuoute humilitie or humble deuotion as he seemeth to haue deuilish arrogancie or arrogant deuilishnesse he would neuer haue accused me or rather the Churche for vsing this humble and deuoute Prayer in the Masse which in spite he calleth my Masse being the common Seruice and Sacrifice of the whole Churche of Christ. But bicause like an vnkinde and degenerate or rather a rebellious sonne he despiseth the auctoritie of his Mother the Church I wil put him in minde of S. Ambrose that holy and learned Bisshop and excellent member of the Churche yet doubting whether he wil ought reuerence one after he hath so insolently contemned them al. Fayne would I vnderstand with what sope or lye he is hable to scoure out the spotte of so vaine wicked and foolish an opinion so contrary to that S. Ambrose writeth Who to prooue that this is the Sacrament the figure whereof went before and to shewe how great a Sacrament it is bringeth in this Prayer vsed in the Masse and wherein M. Iewel findeth so great beguyling of the simple mocking of the worlde and open wickednesse as a most strong argument His wordes be these the same very few wordes excepted that be in Canon of the Masse that so confidently he reproueth both here and also in the Sermon wherein he made the first proclamation of his vaine Chalenge Sacerdos dicit Ambrosius de sacram lib. 4. cap. 6. Ergo memores gloriosissimae eius Passionis ab inferis Resurrectionis in coelum Ascensionis offerimus tibi hanc immaculatam hostiam rationabilem hostiam incruentam hostiam hunc panem sanctum calicem vitae aeternae petimus precamur vt hanc oblationē suscipias in sublimi altari tuo per manus Angelorum tuorum sicut suscipere dignatus es munera pueri tui iusti Abel sacrificium Patriarchae nostri Abrahae quod tibi obtulit summus sacerdos Melchisedech The priest saith Therefore being myndeful of his most glorious Passion and Resurrection from hell and of his Ascension into heauen we offer vp vnto thee this vnspotted hoste this reasonable hoste this vnbloudy hoste this holy bread and cuppe of life euerlasting And we beseeche and pray thee that thou receiue this Oblation in thy Aulter on high by the handes of thy Angels as thou vouchesauedst to receiue the giftes of thy childe Iuste Abel and the sacrifice of Abraham our Patriarke and that which Melchisedech the higest Priest offered vp vnto thee Lo good Reader thus prayed S. Ambrose in his Masse nor for so doing was he euer thought to haue begyled the simple nor to haue mocked the worlde And the whole Catholique Churche hath euer so farre cleared him of al wickednesse not onely open but also priuy that he is holden for a holy Confessour vncontrolled Doctour and strong pillour of the Churche vntil M. Iewel a very begyler of the simple and mocker of the worlde in deede came to prie out in his doctrine and prayer being also the cōmon prayer of the Church a heinous wickednesse Iewel Notvvitstandinge this matter is easily ansvveared For saith he we Sacrifice not Christe againe The Oblation that Christe made vpon the Crosse and ours in the Masse is al one And this Sacrifice Christe hath commaunded vs to continew vntil his comminge If M. Harding make the selfe same Sacrifice that Christe made vpon the Crosse then is he A Priest ofter the order of Melchisedeck And so The king of Iustice The Prince of Peace and a Prieste for euer without Successour For these titles be incident to the Priesthoode of Melchisedeck vvhiche neuerthelesse I thinke M. Hardinge of his modestie vvil not acknovvledge And vvithout the same he can not offer vp to God the same Sacrifice that Christe offered vpon the Crosse. And vvhere he saithe Christe hath commaunded him and his Felowes to make and continew this Sacrifice vntil his
Ecclesiastical writers were accustomed to attribute vnto the chiefe ministers of Gods mysteries as oft or oftener the title of Sacrificers as of Priests or Elders as it may be tried by vewe of the workes written by S. Dionyse Tertullian S. Cyprian S. Chrysostom S. Ambrose S. Hierome S. Augustine S. Leo S. Gregorie and briefly by the writinges of al others from age to age vnto these wretched times when the name and person of a Sacrificer which al good men of times past euer reuerenced and honoured is despised accompted Iewish or Heathenish hated and detested So that the custome which Pachymeres speaketh of to cal a Priest a Sacrificer is now toward the ende of the worlde when Antichrist shal come by the worst sort of men his foreronners interrupted and broken How be it I maruel that M. Iewel who hath so great stoare of phrases wherewith to make shew of somewhat against the Catholiks S. Dionyse vvriâ—ting to Sopater a Priest calleth hiÌ„â—acrificer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and to bleare the eyes of the vnlerned had no better phrase then this of S. Dionyse against the Sacrifice of the Churche Wil it seme likely to any wise man that S. Dionysius was so farre ouerseene as to vse one word for an other specially in that place where he so ernestly aduertiseth one to vtter nothing that may be reproued For that special counsel he geueth Sopater in that Epistle And whereas writing Epistles to others he geueth to ech one his due title of honour and calling as To Gaius a * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Moonke To Dorotheê° a * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Minister or Deacon by interpretation of Pachymeres To Polycarpus a * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bisshop To Iohn the Diuine Apostle and EuaÌ„gelist how shal we think he failed only of the true name that Sopaters vocation was called by Verily had not a Priest in his certaine knowledge and in the iudgemeÌ„t of the learned Fathers of that time the Apostles scholers don true Sacrifice in dede by offering vp the body and bloud of Christe vnto God he wold not haue called Sopater the Priest a Sacrificer But bicause they had the same faith concerning this Sacrifice that the Churche euer sithens had and we nowe haue he doubted not to cal a Priest a Sacrificer as now he is coÌ„moÌ„ly called Neither vsed he that terme only in his Epistle to Sopater but also in his Ecclesiastical Hierarchie where he declared the maner how the Sacrifice was to be celebrated And the custome hath now so preuailed saith Pachymeres Which custome should neuer so haue preuailed in the vniuersal Churche of Christe had not the terme in so weighty a mater bene agreable vnto the truth Thus S. Dionyse whom M. Iewel allegeth for him selfe maketh clearely against M. Iewel Vnto Pachymeres M. Iewel adioineth S. Paule Origen S. Chrysostome to proue that preaching of the Gospel is called a Sacrifice being none in dede and also S. Gregorie Nazianzene calling the people his Sacrifice These authorities might as wel haue ben brought in to proue that Christe offered no true and real Sacrifice vpon the Crosse as that there is no external Sacrifice in the Churche but only a reported Sacrifice by a metaphore For if any man allege to the contrarie the testimonies of the Scripture and Doctors wher they cal Christes death a Sacrifice folowing M. Iewel one may easily answere that both the Scripture and Doctours vsed the word improperly alluding for their delite vnto the Sacrifices of the old Law For behold saith he this is not straÌ„ge S. Paul S. Chrysostome and OrigeÌ„ doe cal preaching a Sacrifice whereas in dede preaching is no Sacrifice And so by a phrase of speache the Sacrifice of Christes death whereon our faith and hope as the ground of our saluatioÌ„ stayeth were like to be remoued and displaced What a fond kind of arguing is this The absurdity of M. Iewels argumeÌ„t The terme Sacrifice is sometimes vsed of the Fathers speaking metaphorically Ergo it is so to be taken when thei speake of the Sacrifice of the Aulter The great absurditie of this argumeÌ„t may easily appeare in the like As for example Baptisme is somtime taken in the Scripture by a figuratiue speach for tribulatioÌ„ and suffering of death as when Christ said Baptismo habeo baptizari Luc. 21. et quomodo coartor vsque duÌ„ perficiatur I haue a Baptisme to be baptized withal and how am I straighted vntil it be accomplished Ergo Baptisme hath no proper significatioÌ„ in the last chapter of S. Mathew where Christ gaue coÌ„mandemeÌ„t vnto his disciples Mat. 28. saying Go ye and teach al natioÌ„s baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost But Christ pronouncing the terme of Baptisme Mar. 7. alluded only vnto the obseruaÌ„ce and Ceremonie of the Iewes whose custome was to baptize and washe them selues when they returned home from the market or common place For thy better instruction herein Reader M. Iewels comoÌ„ Arguments deduced from like to like thou maist be aduertised that these Argumentes à Simili from one like thing to an other be the weakest of al others and most deceiueable and are fitter for a Rhetorical declamation then for a probation of truth called in controuersie And therefore it is a kinde of Argument attributed vnto the Rhetorician to explicate and make plaine a mater and not to the Logician strongly to conuince and piththily to proue a veritie Yet M. Iewel notwithstanding is so in loue with this kinde of prouing in his whole booke of Replie that if his comparisons of one phrase with an other were cut of which he woulde haue seme to be like the rest of his booke should appeare of smal quantitie How be it though it be the slipperest way in reasoning yet if M. Iewel had compared phrases together that were like in dede al circumstances obserued he were the more to be borne withal But most coÌ„monly he maketh his comparisons betwixt those phrases that haue litle or none affinitie at al either for that the one is spoken by a Metaphore and the other properly or the one of one mater and the other of an other or the one in one respect the other in an other And by that meanes he confoundeth the Doctours sayinges M. Iewels custome to put avvay one truth by an other and thinketh he hath done the parte of a lerned man if he may seme to foile and desplace one truth by an other truth As for example In our present case bicause S. Paule and certaine Doctours by a Figure do take Preaching for a Sacrifice which is a truth denyed by no man for it is in deede a kinde of spiritual Sacrifice therefore he woulde haue it seme that the same Doctours neuer speake of any real Sacrifice of Christes body and bloude whereas it is most manifest as it shal hereafter be proued that they speake of both kindes
that I denie not and maketh a long needelesse talke of the worde Dreadful shewing sundry thinges to be called Dreadful wherein he telleth some truth pretending to the Reader thereby as though bicause Eusebius is alleged calling this Sacrifice Dreadful thereof specially I had concluded the auctoritie of offering Christe vnto his Father whiche thing in dede I do not And forasmuch as this much is vntruly attributed vnto me and therefore may with like facilitie be denyed as it is without proufe said and the whole processe of the rest of this Diuision is vtterly impertinent and besides the purpose I thinke this much ynough for answer vnto it that it is not worth the answering The .6 Diuision The Ansvvere Hesychius lib. 1. c. 4. THat Christe Sacrificed himselfe at his Supper Hesychius affirmeth with these wordes Quod Dominus iussit Leuit. 4. vt Sacerdos vituluÌ„ pro peccato oblaturus Ioan. 10. ponat manuÌ„ super caput eius iugulet euÌ„ coraÌ„ Domino ChristuÌ„ significat quem nemo obtulit sed nec immolare poterat nisi semetipsum ipse ad patienduÌ„ tradidisset Propter quod non solùm dicebat Potestatem habeo ponendi animan meam potestatem habeo iterum sumeÌ„di eam sed praeueniens semetipsum in Coena ApostoloruÌ„ immolauit quod sciunt qui Mysteriorum percipiunt virtutem That our Lord commaunded saith he the Priest which should offer a calfe for sinne to put his hande vpon his heade and to sticke him before our Lord it signifieth Christ whom noman hath offered neither could any man Sacrifice him excepte he hadde deliuered him selfe to suffer For the which he said not only I haue power to lay downe my Soule and I haue power to take it againe But also preuenting it he offred vp him selfe in Sacrifice in the Supper of the Apostles which they knowe that receiue the vertue of the Mysteries By these wordes of Hesychius we learne that Christ offered and sacrificed his Body and Bloud twise Firste in that Holy Supper vnbloudely when he tooke Bread in his handes and brake it c Without Diuision of the Sacrifice for it is but one and the same Sacrifice And afterwarde on the Crosse with Shedding of his bloud and that is it he meaneth by the woorde Preuenting Iewel VVe denie not but it may vvel be saide Christe at his last Supper offered vp him selfe vnto his Father Albeit not Really and in deede but accordinge to M. Hardinges ovvne Distinction in a Figure Apocal. 13. or in a Mysterie in suche sorte as vve say Christe vvas offered in the Sacrifices of the Olde Lavve and as S. Iohn saieth Agnus Occisus ab Origine Mundi The Lambe was shaine from the beginninge of the VVorlde As Christe vvas slaine at the Table so vvas he Sacrificed at the Table But he vvas not slaine at the Table Verily and in dede but onely in a Mysterie Therefore he vvas not Sacrificed at the Table Really and in deede but onely in a Mysterie So saith S. Augustine Nonne semel immolatus est Christus in sâ—m etipso August Epist. 23. Et tamen in Sacramento non tantùm per omnes Paschae Solennitates sed etiam omni die populis immolatur Nec vtique mentitur qui interrogatus eum responderit immolari Si enim Sacramenta quandam similitudinem earum rerum quarum Sacramenta sunt non haberent omnino Sacramenta non essent VVas not Christe once offered in him selfe And yet in or by vvay of a Sacramente not only at the Solemne Feaste of Easter but euery daye he is offered vnto the people And he saith no vntrueth that being demaunded maketh answeare that Christe is Sacrificed His reason is this For if Sacramentes had not a certaine Likenesse or Resemblance of the thinges wherof they be Sacramentes then should they vtterly be no Sacramentes Harding The contentes of M. Iewels Replie in this Diuision stand in .4 pointes First he graunteth that Christe offered vp him selfe vnto his Father at his last Supper in a figure or in a Mysterie that is to say as he expoundeth himselfe in such sorte as he was offered vp in the Sacrifices of the olde Lawe But that he was there really and in dede offred he vtterly denieth Secondly for answer to the authoritie alleged out of Hesychius he saith that sometimes he was driuen to streatche and straine the Scriptures to his purpose Thirdly he would prooue his Sacramentary opinion touching the difference betwen the Sacrifice of the Table and the Sacrifice of the Crosse by a place of S. Cyprian leauing out the which foloweth in him being such as clearely determineth the point against him Fourthly whereas I say that Christe twise sacrificed him selfe really he auoucheth it to be reproued by plaine wordes of S. Paule Of the falshode of the first point though I haue spoken somewhat already yet because M. Iewel ceasseth not to sing one song and eftsones repeateth the same tale standing vppon his false Negatiue some deale more semeth here necessary to be spoken that it may appeare how cleare the truth is of our side and how weake the stuffe is that he bringeth against vs. Although he tel not his tale in most distincte and plaine wise as this doctrine of the vnbloudy Sacrifice of Christe ought to be vttered vsing the termes of Figure and Mysterie confusely yet his meaning is plaine yenough verely more plaine then true Which is that Christe offered vp him selfe vnto his Father at his laste Supper in Figure onely and that concerning both the thing offered and the manner of offering For adding as it were an exposition of his owne wordes M. Iewels doctrine touching the Sacrifice is only figuratiue In such sorte saith he as we say Christe was offered in the Sacrifice of the olde Lawe Now certaine it is that in the sacrifices of the olde Lawe Christe was offered in Figure onely whether we consider the substance that was offered or the manner of offering The substance of those olde Sacrifices was a brute beast a sheepe a calfe a goat an Oxe Of which euery one was but a figure onely of Christâ— the manner of offering was slaughter with bloudshed which slaughter was also a figure onely of Christes bloudy death to be suffered vppon the Crosse. So M. Iewels doctrine touching this point is figuratiue on euery side that is to say that Christe offered vp him selfe at his supper in Figure onely Yet vnderstanding with him self and as it were beiâ—g gilty in his owne conscience that this doctrine soundeth very strangely and would offend the eares of the learned Catholiques in the conclusion he qualifieth his tale with termes and shunning the odious woorde of a Figure onely guilefully shifteth in the worde Mysterie saying that Christe was not sacrificed at the Table really and in dede but onely in a Mysterie Nowe that our disputation fal not into wrangling and cauilles here he is to be demaunded what he meaneth by this terme onely in
Nettes neither forsake the great House that is to say the Churche for their sakes who be Vessels made to dishonour Now in case ye also by like rule wil say that they at whose handes the Catholique Churche suffereth suche thinges be not of your side then trie your owne mynde amend your errour imbrace vnitie of sprite in the band of peace Iewel Certainely the holy Fathers and Martyrs of God vvil say unto you VVee knovve not your Priuate Masses vvee knovve not your Halfe Communion vvee knovv not your Strange Vnknovven Praiers vvee knovve not your Adoration of Gorruptible Creatures vve knovve not this Sacrificing of the Sonne of God vvee knovve not your Nevve Religion vvee knovve not you God open the eyes of your Hartes that ye may see the miserable state ye stande in and recouer the place that ye haue loste and finde your Names vvritten in the Booke of Life Harding In the ende of this Diuision by a Rhetorical fiction you make the holy Fathers The holy lerned Fathers tale to M. Ievv and hi◠Cōpanion◠and Martyrs of God to say vnto vs as your blasphmous harte doth phontasie But as we feare not that any suche thing by them shal be tolde vs so were they now lyuing doubtelesse thus would they saye vnto you and them of your sectes as neuerthelesse in their bookes and learned workes they also doo now in effecte say vnto you daily We knowe not your strange state that is without external Sacrifice and Priesthod and consequently without a Lawe We knowe not your eating of common bread and drinking of common wine at your newe founde Suppers in steede of receiuing the true body and bloude of Christe We knowe not your Iustification by your special Faith onely We knowe not your perilous doctrine of Predestination We knowe not your new manner of baptizing without holy oile and other auncient rites and Ceremonies We knowe not your chaungeable new deuised Cōmunions We knouwe not your monstrous Supremacie of Princes in Ecclesiastical maters that is to say the keyes of the kingdom of heauen the supreme Cōmission to feede Christes lambes and shepe and the whole auctoritie that Christe gaue to S. Peter and his Successours so to be vnited by a forced Parlament to the Crowne of a laye Prince that it be made a mater of inheritaunce so that the Prince for the time being be head of the Churche and supreme gouernour in al thinges and causes as wel spiritual as temporal be it man or woman or childe sucking at the Nourses breste We condemne your negatiue Diuinitie which denieth mannes freewil merites of good workes done in grace Prayers made to our blessed lady the Apostles Martyrs and other Saintes to be intercessours for vs to God Prayers for the dead We deteste your wicked and incestuous mariages of Priestes Monkes Friers and Nonnes and of al such as haue made solemne vowe to liue without the vse of wedlocke We deteste your impietie in that ye refuse to adore and doo godly honour to the body and bloude of your Creator in the Sacrament of the Aulter We detest your pulling downe of Aulters your robbing of Churches your schismes and heresies and rebellion against your lawful Princes we detest your prophane contempte of al good religion and godlynes we detest your wickednes we detest you As for you M. Iewel I pray God to touche your harte so as you may be induced rather with some shame of the worlde to recant your heresies and repent to saue your soule then with desperat continuing in that you haue taken vppon you by your foolish and arrogant Chalenge to keepe the vaine estimation of deceiued men and finally to lose your foule for euer The .12 Diuision The Ansvver LEauing no smal number of places that might be recited out of diuerse other Doctours I wil bring two of two woorthy Bishops one of Chrysostom the other of S. Ambrose confirming this Trueth S. Chrysostomes woordes be these Chrysosto in epist. ad Heb. homi 17. Pontifex noster ille est qui hostiam mundantem nos obtulit ipsam offerimus nunc quae tunc oblata quidem consumi non potest Hoc autem quod nos facimus in commemorationem fit eius quod factum est Hoc enim facite inquit in mei commemorationem He is our Bishop that hath offered vp the Hoste whiche cleanseth vs. The same doo we offer also nowe whiche though it were then offered yet can not be consumed But this that we doo is done in Remembraunce of that whiche is done For doo ye this saith he in my Remembraunce S. Ambrose saith thus Ambros. In Psal. 38. Vidimus Principem Sacerdotum ad nos venientem vidimus audiuimus offerentem pro nobis sanguinem suum sequamur vt possumus sacerdotes vt offeramus pro populo sacrificium etsi infirmi merito tamen honorabiles Sacrificio Quia etsi Christus non videtur offerre tamen ipse offertur in terris quando Christi Corpus offertur We haue seene the Prince of Priestes come to vs we haue seene and hearde him offer for vs his Bloude Let vs that be Priestes folow him as we may that we may offer Sacrifice for the people being though weake in merite yet honourable for the Sacrifice Because al be it Christe be not seene to offer yet he is offered in earth when the Body of Christe is offered Of these our Lordes woordes which is geuen for you and which is shedde for you and for many here S. Ambrose exhorteth the Priestes to offer the Body and Bloud of Christe for the people and willeth them to be more regarded then cōmonly they be now a daies for this Sacrifice sake though otherwise they be of lesse desert Iewel This allegation argueth no greate abundance of stoare For Chrysostome in these vvoordes bothe openeth him selfe and shevveth in vvhat sense other Ancient Fathers vsed this vvorde Sacrifice and also vtterly ouerthrovveth M. Hardinges vvhole purpose touching the same For as he saithe wee offer vp the same Sacrifice that Christe offered so in most plaine vvise and by sundrie vvordes he remooueth al doubte and declareth in vvhat sorte and meaning vvee offer it He saithe not as M. Hardinge saithe wee offer vp the Sōne of God vnto his Father and that verily and in deede but contrary vvise thus he saithe Chrysost. in Epist. ad Hebr. Hom. 17. Offerimus quidem sed ad Recordationem facientes Mortis eius Hoc Sacrificium Exemplarillius est Hoc quod nos facimus in commemorationem fit eius quod factum est Id ipsum semper offerimus Magis autem Recordationem Sacrificij operamur VVe offer in deede but in remembrance of his Death This Sacrifice is an Examlpe of that Sacrifice This that we doo is donne in remembrannce of that that was done VVee offer vp the same that Christe offered Or rather wee worcke the Remembrance of that Sacrifice Thus vvee offer vp Christe That is to say an
the people Your selfe also now doutlesse do see it Yet for your worldly estimations sake hauing made suche an Arrogant Chalenge you may not seeme to see it At least what so euer you see you wil not confesse your errrour Thus in ouersight to boast of sight in darkenes to crake of light VVho playeth Thraso his parte the Chalenger or Defender in weakenesse to speake of strength in maters for whiche of your side no learning can be shewed to chalenge al men aliue this is the parte of Thraso But in this Article of the Sacrifice for which we haue so manifest Scripture so many Doctours so many Councels so common and so long continued custome and faith of the Churche for proufe thereof to auouche stoare of testimonies it is not the parte of Thraso it is the confidence of him that knowethâ— how sufficiently the Catholike Religion may be defended against heretiks This serueth not to fray the simple as you say it serueth to cal backe the presumptuous rashnes of a newe Gospeller to animate right beleeuers and to stay the simple As for the wise whether they wil more condemne of folie me for shewing iust confidence in defence of the truthe or you for making suche a proude Chalenge against the truth I leaue it to their secrete iudgementes Bring vs but one plaine sentence of any Scripture auncient Doctor or Councel making clearely for you that a Priest hath not auctoritie and therefore may not offer vp Christe in the Euchariste as I haue brought many for proufe of the contrary and I wil be contente the name of Thraso be not returned vpon you If ye haue none to bring as sure I am ye haue not for your Thrafonical Chalenge that name wil become you better then me that how so euer you wrangle promise no more then I performe That the Reader go not farre for one suche sentence among many of our parte let the very laste alleged out of S. Chrysostome be considered In whiche he saith plainely Châ—ysost in 1. Cor. Hâ—st 24. that Christe commaunded him selfe to be offered Whiche can not be referred to the Sacrifice of the Crosse. For if he had commaunded the Iewes to Crucifie him they had not bene gilty of his Death Neither permitteth the circumstance of the place any other to be vnderstanded then the Sacrifice of the Aulter in whiche Christe him selfe according to his commaundement Doo ye this in my remembrance is as I haue now proued really offered If in defence of your side you can not shew vs so muche as one sentence of like clearenes you must beare with wise men if they thinke the great sturre you haue made with your Chalenge to be great folie And likewise must you beare with your Aduersaries if they reporte you haue more shew of wordes then substance of mater To conclude go plainely to worke M. Iewel The handling of these maters requireth honestie sinceritie fidelitie truth conscience and the feare of God Set vs forth the light of true thinges if ye haue any leaue the darke clowdes of youy Phrases and Figures Conclude your Doctrine with some firme Argumentes confirme it with good and sufficient authorities Be ashamed of your loose and childish Argumentes by whiche in manner alwaies you inferre the denial of one truth by the affirmation of an other truth Let the world see that you allege your testimonies truly iointly and wholly that you falsifie them not by your diuisions taking one peece here and an other peece there by nipping of by adding vnto by hewing mangling and when you doo least by wrong and wrested vnderstanding Otherwise if you shal continue to set maters of Faith vpon vncertaine Phrases and Figures and Tropical speaches to confounde one truth with an other to corrupte to patche together to mangle and by other waies to falsifie as hitherto you haue done be the cotations of your Bookes Margent neuer so thicke be the number of your vnlearned and partial Fauourers neuer so great the wise the godly the learned shal iudge you as they finde you to be but a Maister of Phrases a confounder of Truthes a patcher a mangler a shifter a Falsifier THE TABLE A ABra by M. Iewel reported to be S. Hilaries daughter 172. b This worde Al in Scripture oft-times admitteth exception of many 168. a. b. Amalricus his carkasse digged vp and burnt in Paris 187. a. Anathema pronounced against the dead 186. b. Antitypon excludeth not the veritie of the Mysteries 80. b. Antitypon howe it is taken in S. Clement 81. a. The terme Antitypon maketh not for the Sacramentaries 81. b. Antitypon what it signifieth properly 82. b Apostles made Priestes by Christ at the last Supper 87. a. b. in sequent The Apostles made vowe to forsake al thinges 171. b. The Apostles forsoke the companie of their wiues Ibidem Application of Christes Death no strange Doctrine 219. a. Application of this Sacrifice prooued 114. b. 121. a. 162. a. b. 219. a. Aulters vsed of the Christians 9. a. b. 99. a. Aulter 61. a. 130. a. 225. b. 230. a. Aulter visible and external 60. b. 130. a. 143. a. 229. a. b. Aulters material 99. a. 229. a. sequent External Aulter argueth external Sacrifice 229. a. Authoritie geuen to Priests to offer vp the dreadful Sacrifice 88. a. 128. a. B. Baptisme 9. b. Baptisme doth not only signifie but also exhibit wasshing of sinnes 83. b. Beza 17. a. Beza defendeth it to be lawful to put Heretiques to death 179. a. The Bible corrupted by the Protestantes 167. a. b. Bishoply duetie 246. a. Blouddy and vnbloudy referred to one subiecte 226. a Burning of Heretiques Dead carcasses no newe thing .186 b. sequent C. CAluine defendeth it lawful to put Heretiques to Death 197. a The Canon of the Masse defended against M. Iewels scoffes 123. b. 254. b. 257. a. The prayer of the holy CanoÌ„ found in S. Ambrose 258. a. Ceremonies of the Iewes changed 9. a. sequent Ceremonies of the Christians 59. a. The Chalenger playeth Thraso his parte 261. b. How we see Christe suffering by Charitie 200. b. Christe truly and in in deede offered 35. a. Christ offered vp his body at his last Supper 45. a. 48. a. Christ sacrificed him selfe at his Supper 67. b. 79. b. sequent Christe gaue his body and shed his bloud at the Supper affirmed by certaine Fathers 73. a. Christe sacrificeth and is sacrificed by the meanes or mediation of Priestes 86. a. 127. a. Christe dieth againe in this Mysterie and how 161. b. 162. a. Christ at the Supper both Priest and Lambe 73. b. Christ commaunded him selfe to be offered 79. b. 106. b. 259. b. Christe appeareth before the Father in heauen with his wounded body 117. a. 118. a. The Rocke was Christe and how 1â—7 a. Christes being in the Sacrifice and in reading of the Storie of the Gospel is different 199. a. Christe offred the true bread and the true wine at his Supper 48. a. 204. a.